About your Search

20121101
20121130
STATION
CNNW 21
CNN 14
LANGUAGE
English 35
Search Results 0 to 34 of about 35 (some duplicates have been removed)
that brought down the head of the cia, general david petraeus. another u.s. general is caught in the same tangled web. john allen, top commander in afghanistan, is being investigated by the pentagon for allegedly sending inappropriate e-mails to a married woman, the same woman whose complaint of threatening e-mails from general petraeus' lover cracked the scandal wide open. barbara starr is trying to sort this out for us. it is rather complicated, what's the latest you're getting? >> it is still the same fundamental question for the last 24 hours, wolf. why is john allen being investigated and how on earth did he get caught up in this? marine corps general john allen denies an extramarital affair with jill kelly, the florida socialite whose concern over threatening e-mails led to an investigation that revealed an affair between cia director david petraeus and his biographer, paula broadwell. a pentagon official told reporters allen who commands the war in afghanistan is adamant he did nothing wrong. a senior official close to allen tells cnn of kelly there is no affair, she's a bored soci
will say, we are told, that the cia was able to disprove that. that the video at the end of the day didn't have much to do with it, if anything, but the problem is that disproving of that theory came after he first testified and briefed capitol hill and apparently after ambassador susan rice made those comments. >> that's why it's so significant, it also came after ambassador rice's appearance on the sunday shows, where she is now being grilled by john mccain and others. i'm talking to him in a few minutes. so it's very significant i think what general petraeus believed at the time. it does beg a belief, really, why would ambassador rice go on national television, having had a briefing we believe from the cia, which turned out to be flawed if the director of the cia right away knew this was an al qaeda affiliated group? >> yeah, you know, it's washington, isn't it. i mean, you know, the theory, what petraeus is expected to talk about is he had his talking points. he got them declassified, approved to go out there in public. when ambassador rice started talking from her talking points, th
up. standby. but first, the president's careful responses about the investigation of this former cia chief david petraeus and on negotiations to avoid what's called the fiscal cliff. our white house correspondent jessica yellin was over at the east strip of the white house. you had a chance to speak to the president and ask him about that looming fiscal cliff. >> reporter: hi, wolf. that's right, i did. i asked the president why anyone should believe that he won't cave off of his position that he will not extend bush tax cuts for the wealthiest since he did just that in 2010. he said that he made his case explicitly clear during the last election. and that the majority of americans agree with his position on this. listen to what the president said. >> i think every voter out there understood that that was an important debate. and the majority of voters agreed with me. by the way, more voters agreed with me on this issue than voted for me. so we've got a clear majority of the american people who recognize if we're going to be serious about deficit reduction, we've got to do it in a ba
that complaint within several months lead to the resignation of david petreaus. resignation of the cia director david petraeus and on that note, here is piers morgan tonight. >>> starting with breaking news tonight, you are looking at capitol hill where david petraeus is to testify in front of the senate committee. meanwhile, we are learning more about the agent who was the first to be identified to have started this. he said that the infamous shirtless picture he sent to her was a joke and several years ago. and now we will listen to what the president has to say about the argument over susan rice. >> if senator graham and senator mccain want to go after somebody, they should go after me, and i'm happy to have that discussion, but for them to gof a u.n. ambassador who had nothing to do with benghazi and simply making a prez sentation information she had receive and to besmirch her reputation is outrageo outrageous. >> if the president thinks that we are pick on people, he really does not have any idea of how serious this issue is. >> the benghazi battle turning into a hot issue. i will talk t
of the cia. tell me why i shouldn't be skeptical. ? >> the fbi conducts many of investigations sometimes the are high profile and sometimes less high profile. this was a less high profile investigation but the fbi reports through the justice department and it does not notify the white house or the president about investigations that are underway. my experience is that we got told about indictments that were going to be coming forward and we were not consulted or informed about investigations underway. this is not just something that happens with a republican attorney general. >> you are talking about one of the top intelligence agencies. you are talking about the chief and over a sex scandal that could potentially and had brought him down. it is an issue whether you want to have political judgements exercised. there are no rules here. no laws here. no conventions here other than under a normal circ come stances, the fbi does not consult the white house in these kinds of investigations because no matter who is the president, you don't want the white house to be involved in making the deci
that the station chief from the cia said this was a terrorist attack. obvious to one and all that this was not a "spontaneous demonstration." in real time, they saw there was no demonstration. the -- ms. rice, i hope saw am -- ambassador rice i hope saw that immediately after she spoke, the head of the libyan national assembly, the president of it, said this was an al qaeda attack. everybody knew it was an al qaeda attack, and she continued to tell the world, through all the talk shows, that that it was a "spontaneous demonstration sparked by a video." that's not competence in my view, and think she should have known and she has never yet to this -- at this point declared that she was wrong. and the president is the one who is ultimately responsible, but that is not an acceptable person in my vow to be secretary of state. >> but the dni seemed to be backing her up, saying we disseminated the intelligence to the executive branch, to members of congress. do you think they are falling on their swords, you think they didn't do that? possible they were just wrong and gave out the
: that's right. this is a group of officials from the cia including the acting cia director, mr. clapper and others from the state department have been going around. they had a very long meeting on the house side for the house intelligence committee this morning. by the way, this is the one that general petraeus was supposed to be doing coming back after congress was gone and really giving them the details that they have about what happened in benghazi, why the intelligence community may have not had the correct initial information about what happened there and what they know now. that briefing on the senate side is going on as we speak. and as i mentioned, we're going to hear from the chairwoman in the ranking republican. what we do know is that they are seeing a video that was obtained from the consulate. it was a closed circuit video that intelligence officials are hoping will shed light on what really happened and why the information they had at the time may not be what it turned out to be in the end. >> dana, thanks very much. we'll have much more on this part of the story coming up
7:30 eastern. the former cia -- the now former cia director will be asked to tell lawmakers everything he knows about the september 11th attacks on the u.s. consulate in benghazi. >>> president obama touring hurricane sandy devastation in new york. flying over ravaged neighborhoods in queens, and comforting devastated homeowners, in tents and in the streets of staten island yesterday. the president also assigned a point person for the sandy recovery effort, new yorker sean donovan who is the secretary of the department of housing and urban development. >>> take a look at this dramatic new video just released by the new york and new jersey port authorities. two path train stations under water. look at that. one in jersey city, the other in hoboken. service at both stations remains suspended nearly three weeks after sandy. now nearly all the equipment for signaling and the train equipment was damaged or destroyed. actually missed a classified briefing about the incident, including most republican members of a senate committee investigating the attack. among them senator john m
. it was obvious within the 24 hours that the station chief from the cia had said that this was a terrorist attack. it was obvious to one and all that this was not a quote spontaneous demonstration because in realtime, they saw that there was no demonstration. ms. rise, i hope, saw ambassador rise, i hope, saw when i was on "face the nation" that immediately after she spoke, the head of the national assembly said it was an al qaeda attack. every one new that. and she continued to tell the world through all the talkshows that, that it was a quote spontaneous demonstration sparked by a video. that is not competence in ny view. and i think that she should have known and she has never yet at this point declared that she was wrong. and the president is the one who is ultimately responsible, but that is not an acceptable person in my view to be secretary of state. >> the dmi seems to be backing her up saying we desemnated the intelligence to members of ago. do you think they are falling on their source? do you think they were wrong and gave out faulty inintelligence? >> the other cia station chief withi
. let us know what you think. >>> up next, former cia director david petraeus is going to tell congress when he testifies on the benghazi attack tomorrow. we've got some sources that have information on that. >>> plus, reaction to the video the lawmakers got to see today of the attack on the consulate as it unfolded. the first time they have seen that. we're told it was surveillance video from a drone. we'll talk to law makers on both sides of the aisle and see what they think happened on september 11th in libya. we'll be right back. [ male announcer ] this is steve. he loves risk. but whether he's climbing everest, scuba diving the great barrier reef with sharks, or jumping into the market, he goes with people he trusts, which is why he trades with a company that doesn't nickel and dime him with hidden fees. so he can worry about other things, like what the market is doing and being ready, no matter what happens, which isn't rocket science. it's just common sense, from td ameritrade. which isn't rocket science. thank you, mr. speaker, uh, members of congress. in celebration of over 75
, not from the dni. second of all, it was obvious within 24 hours that the station chief from the cia had said that this was a terrorist attack. and she continued to tell the world through all the talk shows, that it was a, quote, spontaneous demonstration sparked by a video. that's not competence in my view. and the president is the one who is ultimately responsible. that is not an acceptable person, inmy view, to be secretary of state. >> president obama says it is important to find out exactly what happened there but it's outrageous for senator mccain or other republicans to go after miss rice, that it's the president who's responsible, that he should be the one if they want to point fingers or go after anyone. zoraida? >> dan lothian live in washington for us. thank you. >> okay. >>> new developments this morning in "the apprentice" sex scandal leading back to square one. we know the identity of the fbi agent who helped start the investigation that eventually led to the former cia director's resignation. his name is frederick humphries ii, 47 years old and a veteran investigator. also
or our cia thinks. their number one priority is to protect american lives. that's what our job is. now -- ed, we're -- i'll put forward -- i will put forward every bit of information that we have. i can can tell you that immediately upon finding out that our folks were in danger, that my orders to my national security team were do whatever we need to do to make sure they're safe. and that's the same order i would give anytime that i see americans are in danger, whether they're civilian, or military. because that's our number one priority. with respect to the issue of mandate, i've got one mandate. i've got a mandate to help middle class families and families that are working hard to try to get into the middle class. that's my mandate. that's what the american people said. they said, work really hard to help us. don't worry about the politics of it. don't worry about the party interests. don't worry about the special interests. just work really hard to see if you can help us get ahead because we're working really hard out here and we're still struggling a lot of us. that's my mandate. i
for the first time since his shocking resignation as the cia chief. what he's now telling lawmakers about the attack in libya that killed a u.s. ambassador and three other americans. wç?q9iuó >>> exactly one week after a surprise resignation as cia director, david petraeus was on capitol hill this morning. he was testifying behind closed doors. we're now hearing what he told the senate and house intelligence committees about the deadly attack on the u.s. consulate in benghazi, libya. our senior congressional correspondent dana bash has been watching what's going on. what are you hearing, dana? what did petraeus have to say? >> reporter: one of the main reasons they wanted him to come here because he took a trip to libya and he hadn't had a chance to come here and brief lawmakers on. but another was to try to clear up -- i emphasize try, some confusion about intelligence especially in the days after the attack. cameras were ready before dawn hoping to catch a glimpse of david petraeus coming to brief lawmakers about the deadly attack in benghazi one week after resigning in disgrace. petr
cia director has some serious problems as well. president obama pulls out all the stops to keep middle class taxes low, but will congress go along with higher taxes for the rich? plus, a long secret u.s. plan, get this, to explode an atomic bomb on the moon. what were they thinking? i'm wolf blitzer. you're in "the situation room." >>> today we may be at the tipping point for one of the most important decisions president obama needs to make as he begins his second term. on capitol hill republicans including moderate republicans are sending the president a clear warning, don't nominate susan rice to replace hillary clinton as secretary of state. rice is the current u.s. ambassador to the united nations. she spent a second day meeting with senators trying to explain some of her inaccurate comments she made after the september 11th terrorist attack on the u.s. consulate in benghazi, libya. cnn's senior congressional correspondent dana bash is joining us now from capitol hill with the very latest. what happened today, dana? >> reporter: wolf, it was one thing for susan rice to be criticize
're even more concerned, centers around the information that the cia had just after the attack about possible involvement in the benghazi attack that killed ambassador chris stevens and those three other americans. now, ambassador rice did not make reference to this information in her talk show appearances. the unclassified talking points she used were provided by the cia, were stripped of these references to al qaeda, because the information was classified and couldn't be delivered in public. now, after the meeting, ambassador rice acknowledged those talking points turned out to be incorrect. but that she stressed she and the administration never meant to mislead the american people. and what the senators are saying is, as a cabinet member, ambassador rice is privy to this conflicting information, she should have been more discerning when she went on those talk shows, and that the secretary of state should ambassador rice be nominated needs more independent, not just held to party lines. let's take a listen to what senators graham and ayotte said yesterday after those meetings. >> b
, it was ambassador rice who asked for these meetings. she will be accompanied by acting cia director mike morel. what's interesting is that we've seen some of the harshest criticism has been sort of toned down as we heard there from senator john mccain. from threatening to block her nomination as possible secretary of state to a willingness to hear her out, senator john mccain seems to be dialing back his public opposition to ambassador susan rice. >> i think she deserves the ability and the opportunity to discipline herself and her position. >> another vocal critic, senator lindsey graham, is still expressing doubts about her but avoided answering whether he would stand in the way of a rice nomination. >> when she comes over, if she does, there will be a lot of questions asked of her about this event and others. >> whether this apparent new tone is a real shift in thinking prompted by political pressure or more nuance language, the white house is all ears. >> certainly saw those comments and appreciate them as the president has said and i and others have said. ambassador rice has done an excellent j
general petraeus when he was running the cia and his involvement with it. it's ridiculous. ambassador rice made it clear in terms of where she got the talking points from. the republicans in the senate want to attack the white house, want to attack rice. they don't want her to be secretary of state. they don't want to say a word about the intelligence community. i say rice was right to fire back. they should push back. it should be just as aggressive in terms of laying out this is where we got the information from. and even condoleezza rice on fox news said, look, in this kind of situation, you get tons of information and it is always evolving and changing. >> so, caden, is roland right or is senator mccain right? is there more there there? >> i think roland is wrong. let's look at senator graham from south carolina also. if you know his history and senator graham's history, once they dig in, they're not going to quit. what they're looking for is the truth. they've asked for a special prosecutor. eric holder and his own appointees look at this. we have a history here. look. go back to scoo
suggesting the national intelligence director, the head of the cia, they were concocting a politically attuned story, if you will, for the u.s. ambassador to the u.n.? >> i don't know who was responsible for it. that is the thing that we are going to discover. >> they said they did it. they said it wasn't a white house decision. >> it would not be unheard up in the annals of the united states to write something to protect themselves from embarrassment. >> i want you to react to some of the assertions, the accusations that have been leveled at senator mccain, senator graham, that there's an element of sexism and even racism inner that opposition to susan rice. do you believe that? >> i know senator mccain. and i don't think he would go that low. susan rice, as i mentioned, is very qualified to hold this position if the president -- again, i don't want to prejudge what the president may or may not do with regards to susan rice. i think she has served with honor and distinction. and i'm not going to make this about anything other than if the president nominates her, i'm willing to stand b
will be with the acting cia director michael morrell, they're going to be answering questions, at least it's expected, answering questions about why she said what she said when she did. in other words, when she went on those sunday talk shows, how much did she know? what were the talking points? did she really know more than the talking points? did she just stick to the talking points? was there more that she could have looked into? and this, again, i think reflects some of the confusion. don't forget, you know, there are three investigations. congressional, fbi, and state. and until those are completed. >> thank you so much, jill. >> a lot of people here in the northeast looking towards the sky this morning. winter storm we hear headed our way. let's get a quick check on the weather with alexandra steele. >> good morning to you guys. quick hitter. rain and snow. we're seeing it move in this morning and will exit this afternoon. and into the early evening. you can see, of course, the white delineating where the snow is predominantly kind of the axis of this main snow is here in southeastern pennsylva
't that the cia change? they're the ones who edited the talking points so that it wouldn't say al qaeda and i think they used the word to protect their sources, it would say extremist. they made that edit, which to me again seems to go back to the intelligence community. it's not that susan rice got a long list of talking points and said, ooh, i don't want to say al qaeda. let me cross that out. i'm going to use the word extremist. she was given talking point that is removed that word al qaeda and put extremist. isn't that correct? >> who in the administration said susan rice should be the person out there talking about this in the first place? >> so you just don't like her? >> there was the real time information -- no. the real time information that our consulate was under attack. and i'll tell you what bothers me is that someone in the white house situation room or at the state department or the pentagon said it's not worth it. we can't go in and help them. and to understand how long the attack continued, that's really troublesome. the fact that the united states cannot respond within an ho
Search Results 0 to 34 of about 35 (some duplicates have been removed)